Quote of the day—Bruce Rollier

Denying a request to carry a gun in public is not disarming that person; he already owns the gun, and no one is proposing to take it away; just keep it at home. Reasonable gun controls designed to save lives have nothing to do with taking guns away. The writer says that “Examples abound of gun control leading to extermination of dissidents and minorities”, but of course he does not mention any actual examples where this occurred, and there are none.

Bruce Rollier
December 29, 2015
Gun control is not about disarming U.S. citizens
[I would find it difficult to come up with a more disingenuous and/or delusional statement even if I were deliberately trying. This is total crap for brains or alternate universe material.

If you can’t carry a gun in public then you are disarmed in public. Which is,  DISARMED.

No one is proposing to take away our guns? Is the New York Times, numerous politicians, and hundreds of ordinary citizens I have documented as saying they want to take our guns “no one”?

I have to wonder what color the sky is in his universe where Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, The People’s Republic of China, Cambodia, and numerous other countries did not murdered tens of millions of disarmed people.—Joe]

11 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Bruce Rollier

    • On the contrary, they believe everything that comes from their own mouths is “the truth”–even if it contradicts whatever came out of their mouths the day before. And they don’t see anything wrong with that.

      • Yes, I wonder if he would say, as Adolf Eichmann was quoted in the book, “Eichmann in My Hands”, “But – but they were Jews.”

        So he thinks it’s acceptable to allow the keeping and bearing arms in one’s home only. Would he be so sanguine if it were the First Amendment that could only be exercised in one’s home?

        • Quite possibly yes. Remember, this is the same crowd that believes only approved speech should be permitted.

  1. This is right up there with the fundamentalist argument telling Gay men that they can INDEED marry whoever they want…so long as they’re women.

    Sorry buddy, I DO have safe queens that I like to just open the safe and look at, or guns that are really just fun poking holes in pieces of paper at the range….but what about my collection of carry guns? Sorry I have those for ONE reason, to defend my life in case the event happens.

    But Defensive gun use is the elephant in the room for the antis, and it MUST not exist for their arguments to work, so they ignore it.

  2. Also, Bruce Rollier clearly doesn’t understand the word “infringed”. To infringe is to touch upon the margins. To force you to leave your gun at home is FAR more than an infringement, and yet any infringement on your rights is a federal crime.

    So it is that we are bandying with, and entertaining criminals, tolerating them in positions of power. Thus we have only ourselves to blame.

    Why do I say that this is our fault? It is a given, and we all know it, just as the rising and setting of the sun, that there are and always will be those who lust for power and will attempt to gather power in opposition to our God-given rights, our founding principles, and constitutional law. The only question is whether we have the fortitude to stop them. If your roof leaks, you don’t rightly blame the wind and rain. You know that it is your responsibility, for you know that there will be wind and rain, and that if you fail to maintain your roof you are inviting the water in.

  3. He completely missed that whole “keep and BEAR” part, didn’t he?

    Deceitful AND delusional is how I would describe him.

  4. I have to admit, I was struck in particular by the last bit ‘there are no examples’.

    Really? You can -start- with the systematic eradication of Jews in Nazi Germany, and work from there. This guy is either a complete moron or so lacking in any basic honesty that you’d be a fool to try and engage him in debate.

    I wonder if this ass ever heard the saying ‘a right delayed is a right denied’, and who said it. And how it might apply.

  5. Not gun control per se, but close, it was weapons control.

    When I first started getting into the gun rights issues back in the late 1980s early 90s I looked into weapons control back through history. I can’t remember the exact history now, but something I thought was interesting was Rome and Carthage. During the Punic Wars Rome and Carthage had a treaty (the treaty that ended the Second Punic War). Part of that treaty was that Carthage couldn’t have/use troops or have weapons without approval from Rome, no military at all.

    [can’t own or carry a gun without approval of the State, carry permit]

    Carthage was attacked, asked Rome for help, Rome said “Nope”. The people of Carthage defended themselves anyway (and lost). Of course the people attacking Carthage were a client state of Rome.

    Raising an army without approval from the Roman Senate (along with telling Rome to shove it when told to tear down the city and rebuild it inland from the coast) was one of the big reasons for the Third and last Punic war. Rome lay siege to Carthage and destroyed the city, tore down the walls, and sowed the ground with salt.

    [use a gun in self-defense against those favored by the State—criminals, illegals, refuges. Get thrown in jail or get your ass dead by cop showing up on scene automatically shooting person with gun. Other modern parallels are also obvious]

    Disarm a country [person], when that country [person] defends itself from one of your friends, raze that country [person]. Should we call it a Punic War or a Zimmerman?

  6. As the Supreme Evil Lord of Evil wrote, SJW always lie – and when caught/called out, they double down..

  7. bruce is a bit of an idiot, when it comes to history, ain’t he. just shit ignorant. it’s a shame to have to share the oxygen w/ the likes of such a twit.

    it is especially an unforgivable sin, given the recency of hitler, stalin, mao, phol pot and any number of tyrants of the 2oth century who disarmed the people they later killed.

    fucking twit.

    john jay

Comments are closed.